The Consultants' Corner—The RFP in the Automation Procurement Process
| Published date | 01 January 1987 |
| Pages | 99-112 |
| Date | 01 January 1987 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb047684 |
| Author | Jon Drabenstott |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
The Consultants' Corner
The Consultants' Corner--
The
RFP in the
Automation
Procurement Process
edited
by Jon
Drabenstott
Five prominent consultants--
Susan Baerg Epstein, James Rush,
Jose-Marie Griffiths,
Rob
McGee,
and Wilson Stahl--address
the
development
and use of the
request
for proposals (RFPs)
in the
library
automation procurement process. Most
consultants agree that
the RFP is
an effective means
of
selecting
a
system,
if
used properly.
But it
can
be
misused,
is
frequently
substituted
for
sound judgment
and
intelligent decision making
on the
part
of
library
staff, and is
expensive. Librarians often focus
so much
on
preparing
the RFP
that
the goals
of the
planning process
are lost.
The
preparation
of the
RFP
is
only
one
step
in the
procurement
and
installation
process.
It
should
be
viewed
as
one intermediate objective, which
must
be
coordinated with others
to achieve successful results.
Drabenstott
is
Associate Dean
for
Library Services
at Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, Michi-
gan.
Librarians have widely adopted
the
request
for proposals
(RFP)
process
as a
means
for
acquiring
an automated library system. Using this approach,
librarians typically devote much time
and
effort
to writing
an
extensive document, filled with require-
-
ments that collectively define
an
ideal system.
The resultant
RFP is
then sent
out to a
number
of vendors,
who
respond with their proposals.
Librarians then review
the
proposals, select
one
or more finalists,
and
engage
in
negotiations
to
procure
a
system. Throughout
the
process,
a
consult-
ant typically advises
and
guides
the
library
staff.
This
is a
seemingly straightforward process
that many librarians adopt
as a
matter
of
course,
without consideration
of the
larger purposes
or
inherent risks.
The
investment
in the
process
is
heavy:
as
suggested
by
James Rush (below),
a
typical
RFP costs everyone involved
a
minimum
of
$50,000.
Is this process being used
to
best advantage?
To address this issue, five contributing
consultants--Susan Baerg Epstein, James Rush, Jose-
Marie Griffiths,
Rob
McGee,
and
Wilson Stahl--
were asked
to
consider
the
following questions:
1.
What style
of RFP
gets
the
best results?
How
can
RFPs
be
written better?
2.
What types
of
standards
are
typically used
in RFPs?
Are
they practical? What relation
do they have
to the
library's perceived
and
real needs?
Are
expectations generally
too
high
for the
current level
of
deliverable technol-
ogy?
3.
What
are the
roles
of
vendors, consultants,
and librarians
in
writing
the
RFP? What
are
ISSUE
17 99
To continue reading
Request your trial